Cannibalism and Christianity

When
people think of Cannibalism they have a number of reactions. Most of us feel
disgust. But we also experience fear and dread. Humanity today and in the past
simply doesn't like the idea of being killed and eaten. Of course who could
blame us?

However,
it may interest some of you to know that it is a practice which is not confined
to one region of the world. It has at one time or another been practiced
everywhere around the globe.

There are
several types of cannibalism, each associated with a specific reason for doing
it. While we never condone it in our society, we do understand it happening
under certain extreme circumstances. People surviving a plane crash by eating
the dead, for instance. It’s happened more than once in recorded modern
history, and cannibalism for survival probably happened quite a lot in
prehistory.

It is
thought that Neanderthal may have practiced cannibalism. But it is also thought
from bone evidence that we killed and ate them at times.

But
strangely the one type of cannibalism we fear most, that of a tribe with a
taste for a human flesh like we might have for chicken or beef, was always
rare. No.... Not as opposed to “well done.”

There are
the tribes that did it to instil fear in their enemy. If you find your dead
worriers half eaten by your enemy, it can be disheartening. Perhaps even
disarming. The Maoris of New Zealand used it as an ultimate form of humiliation
and dominance of their enemy. For Aztecs it was part of a prayer ceremony for
worriers lost in battle. For some tribes in what is now France, cannibalism was
thought to cure certain diseases. Though I am sure it must have spread some as
well.

However,
the most common forms of cannibalism were and are ritualistic in nature. That’s the kind of cannibalism I am
addressing here today.

Ritual
cannibalism is what is known as: “sympathetic magic”. In sympathetic magic, effect resembles cause.
In other words, you can cause an effect by imitation. (Law of Similarity) The other side of it is
that once things have been in contact with each other, they continue to have a
connection even when separated; and distance is not a factor. This is called
the “Law of Contagion”.

Physics
calls it: “Entanglement.” Just kidding. But it is tempting to put the two ideas
together. Never the less, the above is talking about ancient laws of magic, not
physics. Voodoo works on these principals. The voodoo practitioner has to
obtain something which belongs to his victim, or has been in direct contact
with his victim, before he can perform magic or stick pins in a doll. In fact the doll must contain that item so
that manipulating it affects the intended victim.

Almost every cannibalistic ritual has one or
both of those elements. African
cannibalism is often associated with witchcraft, which by definition has both.

There are
a lot of ways to dispose of a body, and a lot of reasons that we have to when
someone dies. In some cultures they use air burial. This is where the body is
beaten to a pulp on a special stone, and the vultures devour it, bringing the
person closer to the heavens. It should
not be a great surprise that Melanesians employed cannibalism as a method for
burial. It was thought to be much more respectful to the dead then burying
people in the ground or burning them. It had the added advantage of keeping the
dead alive in those who partook. While they ate they would express their grief
and fear. (Law of Contagion)

In 1970 a
tribe of 3000 people, the Korowai tribe, was found in Papua New Guinea. They
had never been in contact with any other humans, and thought they were alone.
They had practiced ritual cannibalism of the dead for probably a few thousand
of years before Protestant missionaries came to the rescue.

The Wari
are a tribe that used to eat their enemies in order to gain their strength. In
eating, they made the enemy’s good attributes, their attributes. And each part
of the body gave specific attributes. Eat a leg, you run faster, eat an eye you
might see better, heart gives courage, etc.

Strange
that beliefs like this only include the good attributes of the worrier. And
even then, they didn’t do him much good if they didn’t help him survive. But
superstition is rarely rational.

The Aghori
had another twist. While they thought eating someone would transfer physical
attributes like the Wari did, they also thought they gained spiritually. Like I
said, they added bit of twist. They also drank human blood because they thought
it could give them longer life.

It might come as a surprise to some that
Vajrayana Buddhism practices ritual blood drinking. The monks have a painted
skull they use in an enlightenment ritual. The skulls are said to belong to
dead monks who had gained enlightenment, and so if you drink blood out of these
skulls you can gain some of their knowledge.

The
Knights Templar (who are a Christian sect) have a similar ritual, in which the
skull is supposed to symbolize that of John the Baptist when blessed.

Of course
we can’t forget mythical vampires who drink blood to gain and then maintain
immortality.

As we can
see, cannibalism and drinking blood played a part in a lot of religions, and
some people would be surprised to hear that Christians practice a form of
cannibalism even today.

John 6

52 The
Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: "How can this man give us
his flesh to eat?"

53 Then
Jesus said to them: "Amen, amen, I say unto you: unless you eat the flesh
of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. 54 He
that eats my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life, and I will raise
him up in the last day. 55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink
indeed. 56 He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in
him.

Later
Jesus breaks bread and offers it to his disciples saying: This is my body. Then
offers them wine saying: This is my blood.

Christians
today practice the Eucharist where they eat a blessed wafer and drink wine.
While there is a lot of debate about whether or not this is symbolic rather
than literal, there is no difference between what cannibalistic tribes did for
centuries, and what modern Christians do.
The two elements of sympathetic magic are at play in the same ways in
both cases.

The
Christian is told to do this for several reasons depending on which book of the
bible you want to read on the subject. In the supper event we see Jesus telling
the disciples to do this to remember or commemorate him. But this is not a
contradiction to what Jesus said before. He was clearly still alive and
instructing his followers on how they should ingest him.

I tend to
think Jesus meant it literally like the Catholics do. Their theory is
called: Transubstantiation. It tells
its followers that when blessed, the wine and bread become the actual flesh and
blood of Jesus. The act of blessing actually transforms the material. This was
decided at the council of Trent after long debate.

There was
another side who favoured consubstantiation, which means that while the host
and the wine remain what they are, they somehow, magically, connect the person
eating it with Jesus. This was declared a heresy by the council of Trent, but
became the official position of the Protestant churches after the reform.

Neither
seem to suggest it is supposed to be thought of as symbolic.

There are those
though who say that it is symbolic of taking in Jesus and the message of god.
Eating it up, so to speak.

But Jesus
himself seems rather adamant that it is not symbolism. In fact, in the original
texts Jesus is said to use the word “trogo” which we translate to eat. But it
really means gnaw, crunch or chew. Had he wanted to say eat in a less
illustrative way he could have used the word: “phago”.

The other
thing that fascinates me is that he always explains metaphors to his disciples.
Mark 4:34 "But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they
were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.”

But here
he never tells them it is a metaphor. Many followers desert him at this point
because he has made it clear it is not a metaphor. He even asks his apostles:
“Does this offend you? Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he
was before? The Spirit gives life; the
flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you—they are full of the
Spirit and life. Yet there are some of you who do not believe.”

Protestants
often say that when he says: “The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for
nothing.” that he is saying that his words were symbolic because he says the
flesh counts for nothing. But he seems be to telling them to believe what he
says if they want everlasting life.
“Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before?” He
is saying: Are you offended by what I said? Then what if you see me go back to
heaven? He is implying: Will you believe then?

The spirit
gives life, the flesh counts for nothing, has to be taken with: The words I
have spoken to you, they are full of the Spirit and life. The idea he has
proposed to them is full of spirit and life. Flesh itself or this earthly life,
means nothing. But for your spirit or soul to get to heaven you have to do this
ritual which bonds you to him via the law of contagion.

Perhaps
they took him literally after all, seeing as there was supposedly no body in his
tomb. But be that as it may, the wine and bread ritual endured and no matter
which side of the fence you are on in the debate of metaphor or literal, it
comes to the same thing. The wafer and wine are supposed to magically create a
connection with Jesus, and ensure everlasting life

This is what so many ritual cannibalistic
beliefs were based on. They were about an enduring connection to the dead.
Making other people and their attributes part of yourself for your personal
gain, or to allow them to live in you. Jesus says as much: “56 He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood
abides in me, and I in him.”

So ritual cannibalism wasn’t as horrible as
we now believe. We even still practice it in most Christian churches. And like
vampires who drink blood to attain and maintain everlasting life, the
Christians drink the blood of their god for the same reason. I see no
difference in the pattern, only in the specifics.

I’ve written many hubs on the desire people
have to make others, as well as things and skills part of themselves. I’ve also
mentioned the fact that love is exactly that: a desire to make someone else a
literal part of you. It is funny that this tendency in human beings is a
pattern that we see in so many aspects of existence. Even cannibalism.

Comments

No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.

sending

Andre 18 months ago

Hi very well written post. I have studied religion since I was young and one of the things I have noticed was that it is symbolic cannibalism. No person wants to say "yes it is". That's the sad part. when does imitating become reality and how would you know the difference when the real thing is present? Transmutation is taking one form and changing it in to something its not. So remember when you eat your savior lol

Bear 5 years ago

Mmmmmmm..... Flesh and blood!!!!! Starbucks coffee PLEASE.....

CuresRiches 6 years agofrom Port Perry, Uxbridge Ontario Canada

Well written article,

Spirit channel cannibalism is very real and most evident in the disease HIV / AIDS. With the addition of nausea and diarrhea and raping spirit channels for cannibal shoo Silvio Berlusconi and his disciples have created a six death a minute free range Auschwitz. Would you like the rape from maggots that eat the corpses too?

For most of us the reality is our political sensibilities that are beneficial for biology are eaten and the daemonic and as you have illustrated religious are crapping their competitive avarice dementia in their efforts to pass themselves off as not so bad.

Silvio Berlusconi is their center piece and he is also the poster pig for WW3.

It really is worth complaining about if only so this one doesn't seem so desperately singular in the effort.

Yours truly, Cures

Author

Ron Hooft 6 years agofrom Ottawa

Thank you. ;)

Simone Haruko Smith 6 years agofrom San Francisco

What a fascinating discussion! Great Hub!

Motown2Chitown 6 years ago

HAHA! I'll see if I can scare up a few for ya! Well written, though, and the title may be enough to draw in a few over the next couple of days. Fear not!

:)

Author

Ron Hooft 6 years agofrom Ottawa

@Motown2Chitown

I never have an objection to getting a larger audience. lol...

qwark 6 years ago

My pleasure Slarty...:)

Qwark

Motown2Chitown 6 years ago

Want me to scrounge up some of the fundies and militant atheists for you?

;)

Author

Ron Hooft 6 years agofrom Ottawa

@Motown2Chitown

I understand. I was actually seriously thinking of becoming a priest when I was very young. Even after I had already somewhat rejected the Church. ;) If I was going to ever be Christian, it would be Catholic. But I would make one hell of a fundamentalist. I'd probably bring back the inquisition to root out heresy. You should all be grateful I'm an atheist. lol....

As for flack, I was hoping to get some, but it seems only reasonable people are leaving comments. Oh well. ;)

Author

Ron Hooft 6 years agofrom Ottawa

Qwark

A Jeffrey Dahmer reference was the the perfect thing for this hub. Thanks. lol....

Motown2Chitown 6 years ago

Thanks a bunch! You enjoy the day as well. :)

qwark 6 years ago

Hahaha Mo:

Glad I gave ya a laugh! :):

You have a good Sunday too!

Qwark

Motown2Chitown 6 years ago

Slarty, I found my way to the Church in part because of the reasons you mentioned above. I've struggled over the years with some of the things that would make Jesus incredibly angry were he to set foot in the Church as it is today. That being said, I still find Him present there like in no other place I've been to worship. Just a hub well done. Hope you don't take a ton of flack for it, but if you do, I'm sure you can handle it (and my guess is that you're fairly well prepared anyway).

Motown2Chitown 6 years ago

Oh my goodness, Qwark, I'm so glad I swallowed my coffee before I read that Jeffrey Dahmer bit. I laughed out loud, startled my husband, and had to share it with him. He found it quite funny as well. Thanks for the chuckle!

:)

qwark 6 years ago

Hi Slarty:

" But my point for this hub was to explore practice rather than validate the words of the bible. ;)"

I know. That's why I said: "I understand your point in mentioning this jesus person and his alledged message of eating flesh and drinking blood as it refers to "cannibalism."

Naw, you covered "cannibalism" well.

I couldn't "top" this hub.

I keep thinking of Jeffrey Dahmer when he invited his mom to dinner and she commented: " Jeffrey, I don't like your friends!"

He replied: "Ok mom, just eat the salad." :):

Anywayyyy.............

Have a great Sunday!

Qwark

Author

Ron Hooft 6 years agofrom Ottawa

@qwark

Hey Quark! Well yes. No one can be sure Jesus said anything. But my point for this hub was to explore practice rather than validate the words of the bible. ;)

Glad you liked it though. And you should write a hub on the subject if it interests you.

Author

Ron Hooft 6 years agofrom Ottawa

@HattieMattieMae

Glad you liked it. ;) Thanks for reading.

Author

Ron Hooft 6 years agofrom Ottawa

@Motown2Chitown

Well that isn't surprising since I was raised Catholic. ;) Even though I am an atheist I prefer Catholicism to all the other versions because their writers are real scholars and they aim for truth. They are also honest about history, often to a fault. Would all the priests were that way. Not that they don't interpret things in their own way. One might say "spin". But it is an honest spin, even though totally being bias. But at least you can see where that happens and correct for it. They also try to be completely rational and non-mystical.

Of course logic depends on where you start. So if you start with a god like that of the bible, then their logic follows. But the question is, is that the correct starting point? And of course I say no. But never the less I have to admire their scholars. Particularly Aquinas.

HattieMattieMae 6 years agofrom Limburg, Netherlands

Very interesting:) Thanks for that!

HattieMattieMae 6 years agofrom Limburg, Netherlands

Very interesting:) Thanks for that!

Motown2Chitown 6 years ago

Slarty, it's funny, because you understand John 6 exactly the way the Church understands and teaches it. That's rare for the majority of people IN the Church. Kudos to you for not only doing the research, but really presenting it in as unvarnished a way as you did. In terms of literal/metaphor - it's been a battle between believers for pretty much ever and will rage until the end of days. I just figure if you're gonna throw in, throw all in, you know? Great hub, seriously.

qwark 6 years ago

G'mornin' Slarty:

...well written, informative "hub!"

We "omniverous beasts" will eat anything! :):

"We've" eaten quite a few missionaries, but they got even by spreading disease and killing millions as they travelled with their message of (ahem) "life and love!"

Of course this jesus never spoke nor wrote a word of the NT, so what folks read of his "sayings" is just heresay passed down thru many, many generations of story tellers and along the way terribly corrupted and embellished.

I understand your point in mentioning this jesus person and his alledged message of eating flesh and drinking blood as it refers to "cannibalism.

I hope everyone who reads that "scripture" can understand how that could be (and has been) so easily misinterpreted and misused by the ignorant and easily led.

I could write a "hub" in response to this "hub," but I'm gonna keep it short and sweet and just offer congrats.